get_delivery_settings

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It clearly implies a read-only retrieval operation from the wording 'Retrieve current...configuration,' which gives the agent reasonable confidence this is a safe, non-mutating call. However, it doesn't disclose auth requirements, whether the config is cached, or error behavior if shipping isn't configured.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

A single colon-delimited sentence that front-loads the verb and resource, then lists the returned fields. Every clause earns its place; there's no filler or redundancy.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a zero-param, no-output-schema read tool, the description does well by enumerating the returned configuration fields, effectively standing in for a missing output schema. It stops short of stating auth needs or listing all field values (e.g., what shipping methods exist), but it's complete enough for correct invocation.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The tool takes zero parameters, so per the rules the baseline is 4. The schema is empty and the description correctly conveys that this is a parameterless call by describing a fixed-scope configuration retrieval, adding no misleading parameter hints.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb (Retrieve) and specific resource (studio delivery configuration), then enumerates exactly what's included: Nova Poshta sender branch, pickup address, enabled shipping methods. An agent can immediately distinguish this read-only config lookup from siblings like get_studio_info or list_orders.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies usage — you'd call this when you need shipping/delivery configuration — but it never explicitly states when to use this versus alternatives like get_studio_info, nor does it mention any prerequisites or exclusions. Usage context is inferable but not spelled out.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.